MOTION TO INTERVENE ALDERMAN SANDY WEIDNER vs CITY OF RACINE

WIS CONS IN COURT OF AP P EALS DIS TR IC T II

Appeal No. 18-AP-1189 S ANDRA J . WEIDNER, P e titione r/Appe lla nt, v.

CITY OF RACINE, Respondent, MILW AUKEE J O UR NAL S ENTINEL, US A TODAY NETWORK .- WIS CONS IN, THE WIS CONS IN FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COUNCIL, THE WIS CONS IN NEWS P AP ER AS S OCIATION, a nd THE WIS CONS IN BROADCAS TERS AS S OCIATION,

Intervenor Petitioners.

Appeal from Orders of the Circuit Court for Racine County, the Honorable Eugene Gasiorkiewicz Presiding, Circuit Court Case No. 17-cv-1644

MOTION TO INTERVENE

INTRODUCTION Milwa uke e J ourna l S e ntine l, US A Toda y Ne twork Wis cons in, The Wis cons in Fre e dom Of Informa tion Council, The Wis cons in Ne ws pa pe r As s ocia tion, a nd The Wis cons in Broa dca s te rs As s ocia tion (the "Ne ws Me dia " or "Inte rve nor

inte rve ne in this proce e ding a nd for a n orde r ope ning the file to Inte rve nor P e titione rs ' couns e l for the purpos e of a llowing the m to a ddre ss the me rits of this a ppe a l.

This appeal relates to the decisions and orders of the Circuit Court for Ra cine County s e a ling a ll ple a dings a s confide ntia l (the "S e a l Orde rs "). In a ddition to the S e a l Crde rs , the Circuit Court is s ue d a de cis ion a nd orde r on pe titione r Sa ndra We idne r's ope n re cords re que st a lso unde r s e a l (the "Ope n Re cords De cis ion"). Fina lly, on Octobe r 3, 2018, the Circuit Court he ld Ms . We idne r, a public officia l, in

2

conte mpt for viola ting the S e a l Orde rs (the "Conte mpt De cis ion"). While the Conte mpt De cis ion wa s is s ue d in ope n court - providing the public a glimps e into the Circuit Court's ra tiona le - the re a soning be hind the Se a l Orde rs a nd Ope n Re cords De cis ion re ma ins unknown to the public. Inde e d, all pleadings are under seal, and even the docket is unavailable for vie wing by orde r of J udge Ga s iorkie wicz. S e e Wis cons in Circuit Court Acce s s , Ca s e No. 17-cv-1644.

This Motion to Inte rve ne should be gra nte d be ca use the Ne ws Me dia me e t the re quire me nts for inte rve ntion

inte rve ne will not unduly de la y the proce e dings nor pre judice the a djudica tion of the rights of the origina l pa rtie s . The pub1ic's interest in transparency and access to the courts we ighs s trongly in fa vor of gra nting this Motion to Inte rve ne a nd ope ning the re cord to Inte rve nor Pe titione rs ' couns e l.

3

PROCEDUR.AL HISTORY Petitioner Weidner has represented Racine's 6th Aldermanic District for nearly twenty years. In 2017, she ran for mayor of Racine. In August 2017, the Racine City Attorney requested that the entire Racine City Council attend a meeting of the Executive Committee normally composed of only the city attorney, the mayor, the heads of three standing committees, and one other alderman. At that meeting, the City Attorney gave a PowerPoint presentation that related to emails that petitioner Weidner had sent to constituents. The City Attorney sought the committee's vote for an advisory opinion from the city's Ethics Board on whether petitioner Weidner had violated the city's ethics ordinance. Afier petitioner Weidner's requests for the City Attomey's PowerPoint presentation were denied, she filed this public records lawsuit against the City of Racine.

4

At one of the firs t he a rings in this ma tte r, the Circuit Court sealed the e ntire re cord. Accordingly, the pre cis e da te s a nd docke t e ntrie s in this ca se a re unknown to Inte rve nor P e titione rs a nd the public. In or a round April 2018, the Circuit Court is s ue d its ruling on pe titione r We idne r's ope n re cords cla im. Aga in, tha t ruling is unde r s e a l. On Octobe r 3, 2018, pe titione r We idne r wa s he ld in conte mpt for viola ting the Se a l Orde rs by, a lle ge dly, re le a s ing informa tion in the sealed documents.

More ove r, a s both the ple a dings a nd docke t of this appeal are under seal, even the scope of this appeal is not tra nspa re nt. To the e xte nt tha t this a ppe a l conce rns whe the r the Circuit Court corre ctly s e a le d the e ntire re cord in this proce e ding a nd whe the r it corre ctly rule d on pe titione r We idne r's ope n re cords cla im, the Ne ws Me dia ha s a dire ct and substantial interest in this appeal as the public has both a

5

sta tutory a nd constitutiona l right to a n ope n a nd a cce ssible judicia ry.

AR G UME NT The Ne ws Me dia s hould be a llowe d to inte rve ne as a

which s ta te s : A person who is not a party to an appeal may file in the court of a ppe a ls a pe tition to inte rve ne in the a ppe a l.... The court ma y gra nt the pe tition upon a showing tha t the pe titione r's inte re st me e ts the re quire me nts of s. 803.09(l) or (2) .

Se ction 803.09(1) e sta blishe s a four-pa rt te st tha t the propos e d inte rve nor mus t me e t: (1) time ly a pplica tion for inte we ntion, (2) a n inte re s t re la ting to the prope rty or tra ns a ction tha t is the s ubje ct of the a ction, (3) tha t the dis pos ition of the a ction ma y, a s a pra ctica l ma tte r, impa ir or impe de the propos e d inte rve nor's a bility to prote ct tha t inte re s t, a nd (4) tha t the propos e d inte rve nor's inte re s t is not adequately represented by existing parties. Se e Bilde r v.

6

Town ofDelavan, 112 Wis. 2d 539, 545, 334 N.W.2d 252

Motion to Inte rve ne s a tis fie s the s e conditions .

1.

The Ne ws Me dia 's Mo tio n to In te rve n e is Tim e ly.

The Ne ws Me dia is una ble to ide ntify wha t, if a ny, spe cific a ctions ha ve be e n ta ke n in this a ppe a l to da te give n tha t, a s with the Circuit Court docke t, the Court of Appe a ls docke t is not a cce s s ible to the public. It is the Ne ws Me dia 's understanding, however, that the record on appeal has not be e n, or only re ce ntly wa s , tra ns mitte d to the Court of Appe a ls . Accordingly, brie fing on the me rits of this a ppe a l like ly will not be gin until a t le a s t the middle of De ce mbe r.

the Court of Appe a ls to rule on the Ne ws Me dia 's Motion to Inte rve ne be fore turning to the me rits of the a ppe a l, ne ithe r pa rty will be pre judice d by the Ne ws Me dia 's inte rve ntion.

7

S e e Bilde r, 112 Wis . 2d a t 258 (concluding tha t the inte rve ntion wa s both prope r a nd time ly give n tha t it did not pre judice e ithe r pa rty.)

2.

The Ne ws Me d ia Ha s An Inte re s t Re la ting To The Tra ns a c tio n Tha t Is The Sub je c t Of This Ac tio n.

The Ne ws Me dia ha s a dire ct a nd substa ntia l inte re st in the ope ning of the Circuit Court re cord to public e xa mina tion.

court "s ha ll ope n to the e xa mina tion of a ny pe rs on a ll books a nd pa pe rs re quire d to be ke pt in his or he r office a nd pe rmit any person so examining to take notes and copies of such books , re cords , pa pe rs or minute s ...." The Ne ws Me dia ca n e nforce this public right be ca use it qua lifie s a s pe rsons who prope rly come unde r the umbre lla of the Wis cons in s ta tute s providing public rights of e xa mina tion of public re cords . S e e Bilder, 112 Wis. 2d at 546 (citing State ex rel. Journal Co. v.

County Court, 43 Wis. 2d 297, 308, 168 N.W.2d 836 (1969)).

8

In Bilder, the Wis cons in Supre me Court conclude d tha t a ne ws pa pe r's inte re s t in ope ning a court file wa s a

the newspaper related to the transaction that was the subject of the a ction. Pe titione r-a ppe lla nt in tha t ca s e ha d cre a te d the is s ue whe n he move d to s e a l the court file on the da y he file d his a ction a nd whe n the court pe rma ne ntly s e a le d the file . Id. a t 546-47. He re , the Ne ws Me dia ha s tha t sa me le ga lly

s ubje ct of this a ction whe n the Circuit Court s e a le d the e ntire re cord in this ma tte r.

3.

The Dis p o s itio n OfThe Ac tio n Will, As A P ra c tic a l Ma tte r, Im p a ir An d Im p e d e Th e Ne ws Me dia 's Ab ility To P ro te c t Its Inte re s t.

The Ne ws Me dia 's inte re s t is the pub1ic's inte re s t.

The public's Firs t Ame ndme nt Right in judicia l tra ns pa re ncy we ighs s trongly in fa vor of gra nting the Ne ws Me dia 's

9

Motion to Inte rve ne to a llow it to we igh in on the me rits of whe the r the Circuit Court corre ctly s e a le d the e ntire re cord in

s ha ll be public a nd e ve ry citize n ma y fre e ly a tte nd the s a me "). While the Firs t Ame ndme nt right of a cce s s to the courts ma y not be a bsolute , it ca nnot be ignore d. Proce e dings ca nnot be close d "unle ss spe cific, on the re cord findings a re made demonstrating that closure is essential to preserve highe r va lue s a nd is na rrowly ta ilore d to s e rve tha t inte re s t.97 Press-Enter. Co. v. Superior Court ofCa!zforniafor Riverside Cty., 478 U.S. 1, 13-14 (1986), see also State ex rel.

LaCrosse Tribune v. Circuit Court, 115 Wis. 2d 220, 340 n.w.2d 460 (1983).

Without a cce ss to the re cord, of course , Pe titione r Inte rve nors ha ve no wa y of a sse ssing whe the r closure wa s essential to preserve some higher value. Regardless, no circumsta nce s unde r which Pe titione r Inte rve nors a re a wa re

10

could jus tify the s e a ling of the e ntire re cord. Ce rta inly more na rrowly ta ilore d tools we re a t the Circuit Court's dis pos a l tha t could ha ve s e rve d s ome "highe r va lue " prompting the se a ling of ce rta in re cords in this ca se .

4.

The News Media's Interest Is Not Adequately Represented By The Existing Parties.

Again, because the record is under seal, the Ne ws Me dia is not privy to the re a s oning be hind the de cis ion to s e a l the e ntire re cord. The Circuit Court's Octobe r 3, 2018 de cis ion on the City of Ra cine 's motion for conte mpt did, howe ve r, re fe re nce the fa ct tha t the City of Ra cine 's re que s t to place the record under seal may not have been contested by pe titione r We idne r or a ny othe r pa rty. Accordingly, a s it is uncle a r whe the r - or to wha t e xte nt - pe titione r We idne r will a rgue for the ope ning of the court file on this a ppe a l, the Ne ws Me dia 's inte re s t in ope ning tha t file is not curre ntly re pre se nte d in this ma tte r.

11

CONCLUSION For e a ch of the re a sons se t forth a bove , the Ne ws Me dia re s pe ctfully re que s ts tha t this Court gra nt this Motion to Inte rve ne a nd, in doing so, gra nt the ir counse l a cce ss to the re cord tha t ha s be e n se a le d by the Circuit Court for the purpos e of filing a brie f on the me rits .

Da te d this 29th da y of Octobe r, 2018.

GODFREY & KAHN, S .C. *

_

!

B

5

J a me s A. Frie dma n, Ba r No. 1020756 Bria n C. Spa hn, Ba r No. 1060080 P .O. ADDRES S : 833 Ea st Michiga n Stre e t, Suite 1800 Milwa uke e , WI 53202-5615 P hone : 414-273-3500 Fa x: 414-273-5198 jfrie dma n@gk1a w.com bwi11ia m@gkla w.e om Bspahn@gk1aw.com 19676974.2

12